Successful Grant Research Articles

Ten Simple Rules for Getting Grants

This piece follows an earlier Editorial, ‘‘Ten Simple Rules for Getting Published’’ [1], which has generated significant interest, is well read, and continues to generate a variety of positive comments. That Editorial was aimed at students in the early stages of a life of scientific paper writing. This interest has prompted us to try to help scientists in making the next academic career step—becoming a young principal investigator. Leo Chalupa has joined us in putting together ten simple rules for getting grants, based on our many collective years of writing both successful and unsuccessful grants. While our grant writing efforts have been aimed mainly at United States government funding agencies, we believe the rules presented here are generic, transcending funding institutions and national boundaries. At the present time, US funding is frequently below 10% for a given grant program. Today, more than ever, we need all the help we can get in writing successful grant proposals. We hope you find these rules useful in reaching your research career goals.

Grantsmanship and Fundraising Practices

This paper discusses various issues and challenges facing philanthropy and nonprofitorganizations in the United States of America. The writer believes that effective grant writingabilities are necessary for leaders in higher education and those who posses these skills will beable to lead more efficiently. The paper will present effective fundraising strategies and discussmanagement techniques employed by veterans in the nonprofit sector. Additionally, descriptionsof each of the nine major areas associated with foundation funding are summarized, and certaingrantsmanship practices are highlighted. Finally, this paper will discuss seven basic componentsnecessary for writing a successful grant proposal.

Funding and Grantsmanship

Medical research funding in the United States has 4 predominant sources: the federal government; the pharmaceutical industry; institutions; and private foundations. In each case, the grant application process is the first step in obtaining funding. Successful grant applications are logical, organized, and easy to read. The research question should be both specific and significant. Comprehensive and detailed study methods addressing the study population, timeline, and data collection and management increase the likelihood of obtaining funding. Funding for inflammatory bowel disease preclinical and clinical research is available from the National Institutes of Health and Crohn's & Colitis Foundation of America.

A framework to evaluate research capacity building in health care.

BackgroundBuilding research capacity in health services has been recognised internationally as important in order to produce a sound evidence base for decision-making in policy and practice. Activities to increase research capacity for, within, and by practice include initiatives to support individuals and teams, organisations and networks. Little has been discussed or concluded about how to measure the effectiveness of research capacity building (RCB)DiscussionThis article attempts to develop the debate on measuring RCB. It highlights that traditional outcomes of publications in peer reviewed journals and successful grant applications may be important outcomes to measure, but they may not address all the relevant issues to highlight progress, especially amongst novice researchers. They do not capture factors that contribute to developing an environment to support capacity development, or on measuring the usefulness or the 'social impact' of research, or on professional outcomes.The paper suggests a framework for planning change and measuring progress, based on six principles of RCB, which have been generated through the analysis of the literature, policy documents, empirical studies, and the experience of one Research and Development Support Unit in the UK. These principles are that RCB should: develop skills and confidence, support linkages and partnerships, ensure the research is 'close to practice', develop appropriate dissemination, invest in infrastructure, and build elements of sustainability and continuity. It is suggested that each principle operates at individual, team, organisation and supra-organisational levels. Some criteria for measuring progress are also given.SummaryThis paper highlights the need to identify ways of measuring RCB. It points out the limitations of current measurements that exist in the literature, and proposes a framework for measuring progress, which may form the basis of comparison of RCB activities. In this way it could contribute to establishing the effectiveness of these interventions, and establishing a knowledge base to inform the science of RCB.

New Editor's Introduction

With this issue, I begin my term as editor of The Career Development Quarterly (CDQ). Being editor of CDQ is a great honor and an even greater responsibility. As the editor of the premier journal informing career counseling and development, I have now been given the task to both maintain the reputation and quality and, if I have a particularly good run of luck, even enhance it. A new editor's first editorial should be pithy, introducing the new editor and the new vision, as well as thanking all those whose hard work make our journal possible. I bow to that tradition. I do think that it is good for you (readers and authors) to have a little better idea of what you are getting with a new editor, and, as a counselor, I do think that a little appropriate disclosure can be useful. For those of you who do not know me, I was born a poor, gay, Cherokee boy in rural southeastern Missouri. Coming from such roots motivated me and made me appreciate what has happened in my career. Such a background, along with a strong need to provide succorance (supported by my scores on this subscale of the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule and on similar subscales of the Strong Interest Inventory, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, and an early Kuder), led me to counseling as my career choice. My area of specific expertise in our field is multicultural career counseling, and I have published mainly in that area; however, I also have expertise in the history of and the public policy issues in career counseling, career interest assessment, international career development, organizational career development, and the teaching of career counseling. I am somewhat unusual in many ways in our career development profession and bring a variety of experiences to the editorship of CDQ that I hope will be useful. I have a strong practice background, including more than 20 years in independent practice that I hope will allow me to have sensitivity to and knowledge of articles that may be especially relevant to career development practitioners. (I hold certifications as a Master Career Counselor, Registered Professional Career Counselor [California], and National Certified Career Counselor.) I have a strong research background that I hope will allow me to select articles that advance the science and knowledge of our profession. I have a strong advocacy and social justice background that I hope will enable me to recruit and select, nurture, and mentor authors, as well as editorial board members, who reflect the broad, inclusive diversity of our world. Finally, I also have strong organizational, administrative, financial, and political skills, having been a manager and leader of people and organizations, both for-profit and intentionally not-for-profit organizations. I ought to be good at this. You, my peers, will ultimately be the judge. These organizational skills are well developed from years of service to the profession in a variety of leadership roles, from editorial responsibilities for books and special issues/sections and from leading such projects as the development of successful grant proposals as well as institutional self-study materials for accreditation. I am considered by my colleagues to be a well-organized and action-oriented person. I hear from my predecessors that these are important characteristics for editors. Most important, I am a practicing professional career counselor, organizational consultant, counselor educator, and vocational psychologist. The commitment from the previous editors has always been to preserve the nature of CDQ: It is a practice-focused journal, and each article must address the implications of the article for career counselors and other career development professionals. It is my intention to continue that critical tradition. The foregoing, then, is a natural segue to my vision. During the next 3 years, CDQ will grow dynamically in response to the needs of our field. The structure-Articles, Effective Techniques, Personal Perspectives, Reader Reactions, Brief Reports-will remain the same, but the quantity of articles appearing in those sections will increase. …

Academic Clinical Oncology and Radiobiology Research Network (ACORRN): An NCRI Initiative to Address the Infrastructure and Capacity Deficit in Radiotherapy and Radiobiology Research in the UK

Radiotherapy remains the most commonly used anticancer treatment, and currently 50% of cancer patients in the UK are treated with radiotherapy at some point in their management. Radiotherapy is second only to surgery in its curative potential. Over the past 10 years, rapid technological advances have allowed more accurate radiotherapy delivery. We are also moving closer to being able to optimise patient treatment based on a rapidly evolving understanding of the genetics and biology of individuals and their tumours, and how these relate to prediction of treatment outcomes. The expectation of these advances over the coming years is that more patients will now be cured of their cancer, with a reduction in treatment-related side-effects. The current position in the UK, however, contrasts with much of the progress seen in cancer biology, with a sharp decline in the number of clinical academics and radiation biologists over the past 10 years. This has resulted in the radiotherapy and radiobiology communities having insufficient infrastructure or individuals to respond to the Department of Health need to develop and capitalise on these advances. To address the infrastructure and capacity deficit, the National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI), in response to a proposal from the research community, has established a UK network (ACORRN), aiming to develop an integrated UK radiotherapy and radiobiology

Book Review: Successful Grant Writing: Strategies for Health and Human Service Professionals (2nd ed.)

Book Review: Successful Grant Writing: Strategies for Health and Human Service Professionals (2nd ed.)

TH-C-W-608-01: Grantsmanship Workshop

The workshop on grantsmanship will cover the required elements for writing a successful grant. Speakers will discuss the NIH grant review process, what reviewers look for, and how to get one's ideas across to the reviewers. There will be a focus on important strategies that successful grantees use in the grant preparation process and common mistakes in NIH grant applications to avoid. Following speaker presentations, a panel discussion will be held.

An Excerpt from: Physical Educators' Guide to Successful Grant Writing

An Excerpt from: Physical Educators' Guide to Successful Grant Writing

Practicing Invisibility: Women’s Roles in Higher Education

In this article, two female academics confront their role in producing their own invisibility and ir-relevance in the practice of higher education. Drawing on feminist standpoint theory, the authors interrogate their participation in articulation work that helped male colleagues to assume roles of higher status. Based on an analysis of personal narratives and the text of an international e-mail exchange that resulted in a successful grant proposal, the authors argue that the hierarchical and patriarchal cultural history of the academy as well as the intrusion of gendered relations from contexts beyond the institution of higher education undermine the democratic intentions of aca-demics, both male and female, who espouse horizontal collaborative relations between academics. This case study illustrates the contradiction between egalitarian institutional rhetoric and value systems of individuals and the hierarchical and gendered power relations that play out in everyday life in the academy. The authors conclude that while both male and female academics must work to change the gendered text of higher education, women in the academy must build both critical mass and mentoring networks in consciously acting to change the institution’s cultural history.

An Evidence-Based Guide to Writing Grant Proposals for Clinical Research

The competition for funds to conduct clinical research is intense, and only a minority of grant proposals receive funding. In particular, funding for patient-oriented research lags behind that allocated for basic science research. Grant writing is a skill of fundamental importance to the clinical researcher, and conducting high-quality clinical research requires funds received through successful grant proposals. This article provides recommendations for the grant-writing process for clinical researchers. On the basis of observations from a National Institutes of Health study section, we describe types and sources of grant funds, provide key recommendations regarding the process of grant writing, and highlight the sections of grants that are frequently scrutinized and critiqued. We also provide specific recommendations to help grant writers improve the quality of areas commonly cited as deficient. Application of this systematic approach will make the task more manageable for anyone who writes grants.

Raising Thunder with the Secesh: Powell Clayton's Federal Cavalry at Taylor's Creek and Mount Vernon, Arkansas, May 11, 1863

BY LATE SPRING 1863, MAJ. GEN. ULYSSES S. GRANT and his Army of the Tennessee seemed on the brink of capturing the Mississippi River stronghold of Vicksburg. With Grant persevering through six months of unsuccessful maneuvering, Confederates in the west faced for the first time an unrelenting Federal leader. Confederate brigadier general John S. Marmaduke persuaded Gen. Theophilus H. Holmes, commanding the Trans-Mississippi Department, that raids against Federal supply lines might hinder Grant's efforts. The Confederates hoped to destroy the Federals' supply depots in Missouri, where they stored material and produce from northern factories and farms before shipping it south. Raids might also replenish drastically-reduced Confederate supplies and even cause Grant to divert some Vicksburg-bound troops to the relief of Missouri. Marmaduke left Batesville, Arkansas, in late April with five thousand cavalrymen and headed for Union-held river ports in southeast Missouri. Their main target was the depot at Cape Girardeau. Despite Marmaduke's best efforts, though, the raid was a complete failure. By early May, the Confederate raider concentrated the remnants of his command on Crowley's Ridge, fifty to sixty miles north of Helena, Arkansas. Without delay, Federal cavalry forces at Helena took measures to counteract any move on the part of these Confederate troops into the immediate vicinity. Encounters at Taylor's Creek and Mount Vernon in St. Francis County, Arkansas-heretofore only incompletely examined-helped ensure the maintenance of Federal superiority in eastern Arkansas and enhanced the prospects of Grant's success at Vicksburg. The Federal troops involved in this fighting belonged to the 2nd Cavalry Division, Army of the Tennessee, commanded by Col. Cyrus Bussey, 3rd Iowa Cavalry. Bussey's cavalry regularly patrolled the area between Wittsburg, Cotton Plant, St. Charles, and Helena.1 His brigade leaders included Lt. Col. Benjamin L. Wiley, 5th Illinois Cavalry, and Col. Powell clayton, 5th Kansas. Wiley, a forty-two-year-old political appointee from southern Illinois, had little command experience. clayton, by contrast, had extensive experience, including a military education and command of many expeditions in the region. clayton began his military career in a militia company at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. He became lieutenant colonel of the 5th Kansas in December 1861, then assumed command of the regiment in March 1862. The thirty-year-old Pennsylvania native, who later served as Arkansas's governor and U.S. senator during Reconstruction, became one of Bussey's most trusted and experienced leaders. clayton's guidance molded the 5th Kansas into a reliable, hard-fighting regiment. The Kansans had a reputation for ruthless warfare against the local population, who feared the 5th's efficiency in the burning and pillaging of their homes. Under the direction of Lt. Col. Wilton A. Jenkins and Maj. Samuel Walker, who commanded most of the 5th Kansas's patrols, the regiment earned the nickname Walker's Jayhawkers. Born in Pennsylvania, the forty-one-year-old Walker had moved to Kansas in 1855 and became a prominent and influential Free-Soiler. At the start of hostilities, Walker joined the 1st Kansas Infantry, serving as captain of Company F before being commissioned major of the 5th Kansas in May 1862. Jenkins joined Company G, 5th Kansas, as a 1st lieutenant in October 1861, but his energetic drive had propelled him to the rank of lieutenant colonel by May 1862. Jenkins also rose rapidly in the esteem of his men, who admired his leadership and fighting abilities.2 In the late summer 1862, Bussey's troops had been challenged by Confederate cavalry, who began patrolling the Helena area with orders to disrupt Federal operations. One of the Federal cavalry's most successful adversaries was Maj. William Walton, 21st Texas Cavalry. An ardent secessionist, Walton had joined the 21st Texas in March 1862. His handpicked scouting parties joined a growing body of troops who became notorious for capturing Federal cavalry stragglers, ambushing foraging parties, and generally creating havoc. …

Preparing a Successful Grant Proposal—Part 1

Beitz, Janice M.; Bliss, Donna ZimmaroEditor(s): Whitney, JoAnne D. PhD, RN, CWCN Author Information

Sacrificing Leaders, Villainizing Leadership: How Educational Accountability Policies Impair School Leadership

Has the culture of accountability become a culture of fear for school leaders? The authors share the stories of three successful principals whose careers and reputations were altered by the impact of a set of test scores. AT A PRESS conference following the signing of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act in January 2002, Secretary of Education Rod Paige declared, With the stroke of his pen, President Bush changed the culture of education in America.1 If the history of the Texas accountability system -- upon which NCLB is based2 -- is any indication, Secretary Paige's words may prove prophetic. But the change brought about by NCLB may not be what Secretary Paige or President Bush envisioned. The impact of high-stakes accountability on school leadership has yet to be deeply explored. However, evidence is beginning to emerge, particularly from Texas, a state with the longest-standing and most sophisticated accountability model in the nation. On the commentary page of a major urban newspaper in Texas, public school principal Benjamin Kramer noted, What is not immediately apparent, however, is the fear running rampant throughout the system from the highest levels of leadership to, unfortunately, the classroom level. He closes his op-ed piece by saying, the next Legislature comes into session, the time has come to question whether the system we designed years ago to guarantee children a brighter future has come to cloud the present, reducing public schooling to a fear-driven exercise in test preparation.3 Perhaps this culture of educational accountability, created by well- intended policy makers aiming to improve schools, has instead become a culture of fear, driven by unanticipated consequences of the system. For example, school leaders, whose performance was once assessed using a variety of indicators that reflected the complexity of the job, are now finding their effectiveness determined in much narrower terms. Through our professional contacts and affiliations with professional organizations, we became aware of a number of school principals who were removed from their posts as a result of student test scores generated by the Texas accountability system. Eager to know more, we began to ask individuals to share their stories. Three agreed to do so with the assurance that their identities would be carefully protected. At the outset, we anticipated hearing distinctly different narratives. However, the principals' experiences proved to be alike on many fronts and clustered around three primary themes: Accomplished Careers, Without Warning, and From Collaboration to Isolation. Accomplished Careers Together, the participants in our study have over 60 years of service, more than 20 of those as administrators. As teachers with reputations for instructional innovation, they were tapped for leadership roles by members of the upper administration. Two were chosen for very select principal development programs sponsored by their districts. One was appointed to open a new campus and was not even interviewed for the job. One received school board recognition for raising test scores just three months before being removed from the principalship. Another was removed just after being elected by peers as a principal leader. Years' worth of formal evaluations indicate that the principals' supervisors viewed them as stellar educators. In addition to being acknowledged as successful leaders within their districts, the participants were also viewed as outstanding leaders by those outside their districts. Educator and community groups recognized them for their exceptional work by bestowing awards and honors, including statewide teacher of the year, LULAC (League of United Latin American Citizens) outstanding educator, and young city leader. Two were invited to enroll in an exclusive Ph.D. program at a major research university. Two are published authors, and all are successful grant writers. …

Basic science faculty in surgical departments: Advantages, disadvantages and opportunities

The number of Ph.D. faculty in clinical departments now exceeds the number of Ph.D. faculty in basic science departments. Given the escalating pressures on academic surgeons to produce in the clinical arena, the recruitment and retention of high-quality Ph.D.s will become critical to the success of an academic surgical department. This success will be as dependent on the surgical faculty understanding the importance of the partnership as the success of the Ph.D. investigator. Tighter alignment among the various clinical and research programs and between surgeons and basic scientists will facilitate the generation of new knowledge that can be translated into useful products and services (thus improving care). To capitalize on what Ph.D.s bring to the table, surgery departments may need to establish a more formal research infrastructure that encourages the ongoing exchange of ideas and resources. Physically removing barriers between the research groups, encouraging the open exchange of techniques and observations and sharing core laboratories is characteristic of successful research teams. These strategies can meaningfully contribute to developing successful training program grants, program projects and bringing greater research recognition to the department of surgery.

How to write a grant application

Summary This paper outlines the basic areas of work needed to write a successful grant application, the timetable you need to work to and the issues that most often cause problems. It is vital to read the background literature thoroughly and allow plenty of time, both to develop your protocol and for your application to be processed. Power calculations are essential at an early stage. Costing the study needs good quality information to ensure that all aspects have been fully covered. As a rule it is better to overestimate costs rather than the reverse. ^ 2002 Harcourt Publishers Ltd

Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University.

Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University.

One Path to a Research Career

One Path to a Research Career

Eight Mini-Lessons in Budgeting for Grant Proposal Writing

As education funding becomes more the responsibility of faculty members at higher education institutions and teachers at public and private K-12 schools, writing successful grant proposals is an essential skill. With several years experience as a productive grant proposal writer, Project Director, and Principal Investigator, the author shares eight lessons learned when writing the budget of a grant proposal.

Developing a Successful Application for Research Funding

Summary Increasing competition for research funding means that the majority of researchers who apply for funding at any one time are likely to be unsuccessful. This paper identifies some of the key issues which need to be considered in developing applications for research funding and explores ways in which these issues can be managed in order to maximise the chances of applications being successful. Preparing grant applications takes time, and the initial planning stages of identifying a research idea, developing the research team and identifying an appropriate funder are necessary first steps. The content of the proposal should comprise details of what is known about the topic, what the research is about, what it is trying to achieve, how it will be undertaken, what will be learnt from it, and why it is worth doing. Consideration must also be given to the issues raised by the Research Governance Framework which need to be taken into account in preparing an application. Careful preparation of the budget is necessary as, once an award for funding is made, it is generally not possible to ask for further funding if the amount needed is greater than expected. Plans for dissemination are also important and should include distribution to research participants as well as to the professional and scientific community. The competitive nature of research funding means that successful grant writing is increasingly likely to involve repeated re-submissions of a re-drafted application and researchers need to be willing to learn from the feedback provided through the peer review process.